Spending is out of control. The GOP is just as guilty as the Democrats for it too, which is why I refer to them as "Republicrats". Both parties have the same goal in mind - control where the money flows - the only difference is where they want it to go, and they don't always disagree on that. Neither of them truly cares to reduce spending, they want to reduce it over "there" so we can spend it "here" instead.

pecosdave:Spending is out of control. The GOP is just as guilty as the Democrats for it too, which is why I refer to them as "Republicrats". Both parties have the same goal in mind - control where the money flows - the only difference is where they want it to go, and they don't always disagree on that. Neither of them truly cares to reduce spending, they want to reduce it over "there" so we can spend it "here" instead.

pecosdave:Spending is out of control. The GOP is just as guilty as the Democrats for it too, which is why I refer to them as "Republicrats". Both parties have the same goal in mind - control where the money flows - the only difference is where they want it to go, and they don't always disagree on that. Neither of them truly cares to reduce spending, they want to reduce it over "there" so we can spend it "here" instead.

What a bold position you took there! You're the first one ever to point out that both sides are bad, but to do so by coining the phrase "Republicrats" is GENIUS! It's like you just sorta combined the names of the two parties, thereby demonstrating that there's no difference between the two. Which would be awesome if it weren't complete, utter bullshiat.

Republicans demand that President Obama produce an offer of higher spending cuts, and Obama replies that Republicans should say what spending cuts they want, and Republicans insist that Obama should try to guess what kind of spending cuts they would like.

Uh, TFA author isn't wrong here. I keep hearing about "cuts" but only in nebulous form.

pecosdave:Spending is out of control. The GOP is just as guilty as the Democrats for it too, which is why I refer to them as "Republicrats". Both parties have the same goal in mind - control where the money flows - the only difference is where they want it to go, and they don't always disagree on that. Neither of them truly cares to reduce spending, they want to reduce it over "there" so we can spend it "here" instead.

When Eric Cantor went on The Daily Show a couple of years ago, Stewart showed a rarely seen angry streak. He basically called bullsh*t. To paraphrase it, "Stop telling me you want smaller government. The only difference is where you the government involved."

And he was right. We have multiple examples of Republican administrations ballooning the deficit, and yet they still look at us with a straight face and claim to be the party of "fiscal responsibility."

Well, they can all just fark right off. Just like Fox makes loud claims to be the polar opposite of what they actually are, the GOP will piss on my leg and tell me it's raining. And they have the nerve to wonder aloud why fewer people are taking them seriously these days.

Decent enough article I suppose. What seems to be lacking, here and in other discussions, is that Congress is the body that approves spending. So it seems a little disingenuous to me to hear from them that "spending is out of control."

Coupled with the fact that they were on a spending spree and ran up the national card under Bush, I can only conclude that their real concern is not out of control spending. It's to stymie the president and preserve the many gifts to the rich, which we cannot afford, given under Bush.

Words and deeds.

And people like Orin Hatch should cram it. He fully admitted they didn't even think about how to pay for shiat when Bush was in the White House.

Do I believe we need to restrain spending? Sure, if done intelligently and fairly. Do I believe Congress is serious about it? Fark no.

Anyway, I think you need to be more honest and say that spending WAS out of control, but with the winding down of two unfunded wars, things are steadily improving.

May not be at its peak, but it's still looks a little out of control to me.

You want instant results?

The economy doesn't work like your broadband internet connection. These things take TIME. You maybe need to revisit your expectations and consider taking a more reasonable approach here. Maybe buy a better watch?

Anyway, I think you need to be more honest and say that spending WAS out of control, but with the winding down of two unfunded wars, things are steadily improving.

May not be at its peak, but it's still looks a little out of control to me.

You want instant results?

The economy doesn't work like your broadband internet connection. These things take TIME. You maybe need to revisit your expectations and consider taking a more reasonable approach here. Maybe buy a better watch?

Seriously.

Ever run up your credit? Try doing that, while also cutting your salary. Tell me how long it takes you to pay that off. Eating Ramen will only get you so far.

The economy doesn't work like your broadband internet connection. These things take TIME. You maybe need to revisit your expectations and consider taking a more reasonable approach here. Maybe buy a better watch?

Are you defending a president, a party, or a timeline?

It's inexcusable now, it was inexcusable 5 years ago, 10 years ago, 15 years ago. If you're defending parties you're doing the wrong thing, it's nothing but one group of thugs versus another. "Both" parties are guilty and if you're using that recent dip to defend the whole system you're still defending criminals either way. My watch is set via NIST BTW.

Anyway, I think you need to be more honest and say that spending WAS out of control, but with the winding down of two unfunded wars, things are steadily improving.

May not be at its peak, but it's still looks a little out of control to me.

You want instant results?

The economy doesn't work like your broadband internet connection. These things take TIME. You maybe need to revisit your expectations and consider taking a more reasonable approach here. Maybe buy a better watch?

Seriously.

Ever run up your credit? Try doing that, while also cutting your salary. Tell me how long it takes you to pay that off. Eating Ramen will only get you so far.

True. Two wrongs and all that. But the fact remains that Obama has plans for or already has paid for what he's proposed. That was not true under Bush. All I'm saying is the mewling from Republicans right now is highly hollow. In addition to the fact that they are complicit in national spending. That's a large part of their job.

Trivia Jockey:Diogenes: For as much as I hate the guy, I don't think we can lay this one at his feet. "Tax and spend liberals" is an falsehood and anachronism that refuses to die. Reality be damned.

I know, that last part was just a joke. But those cliches like the one you mention above are very real, and (unfortunately) they have real power.

Absolutely. Come with me to my family xmas dinner, and you can hear all about how liberals support big government & big spending, and they're bankrupting the country by wanting to give handouts to all the deadbeats and also socialism.

kid_icarus:Absolutely. Come with me to my family xmas dinner, and you can hear all about how liberals support big government & big spending, and they're bankrupting the country by wanting to give handouts to all the deadbeats and also socialism.

The GOP claim that "__________" sounds like a rational argument, until you fact-check it

a. Poor women shouldn't have access to reproductive health careb. Gay people marrying will cause the end of the worldc. There is a war on Christmas which will result in Baby Jesus being lynched in the streetd. Obama is going to double the tax on a bottle of aspirin -- because it's white and it works

It's unfortunate our political parties have polarized the people such as they have. The fundamental differences between left and right thinking people are how they approach things, rugged individualism or strength in numbers. Neither is exclusive in their thinking, it's just their default mindset. Left and right thinking people compliment and strengthen one another when they're not polarized into fighting about everything. Both types of people are valuable to society as a whole and keep each other in a balance in a "normal" state of affairs. I'm convinced most of the special interest that polarize the two groups would be easily become background noise if there weren't faction on either side pounding the war drums pushing the fights.

pecosdave:It's unfortunate our political parties have polarized the people such as they have. The fundamental differences between left and right thinking people are how they approach things, rugged individualism or strength in numbers. Neither is exclusive in their thinking, it's just their default mindset. Left and right thinking people compliment and strengthen one another when they're not polarized into fighting about everything. Both types of people are valuable to society as a whole and keep each other in a balance in a "normal" state of affairs. I'm convinced most of the special interest that polarize the two groups would be easily become background noise if there weren't faction on either side pounding the war drums pushing the fights.

The article resonated with me on the GOP's unwillingness to name what it is they want to cut (the Pauls excepted). But the article claims spending is rock-bottom. Were we to cut Defense spending by 50%, we're looking at a deficit for 2012 that's almost $1t - a number few people argue can be made up with revenue (we can get maybe halfway there). So if the article is right, we can't do anything and we're completely doomed. That doesn't seem likely.

There's a laundry list of sins that have been committed over the last few decades, and trying to argue over it now is like trying to argue over Israel Palestine and never getting past who did what to whom 90 years ago. The truth is that we have a serious problem that needs addressing, and the Republicans in the legislature have not been honest in dealing with Obama, being more concerned about their party's short-term vulnerability. They're still being cowards, and yet they're trapped because Obama is holding the best hand and he knows it. He's apparently willing to go off the cliff, now that his job is safe. Had Romney won, the situation would be reversed, and it would be the Democrats who were backed into a corner. But events have not been kind to Republicans, and their unwillingness to deal with reality is driving us off an entirely different cliff.

pecosdave:Left and right thinking people compliment and strengthen one another when they're not polarized into fighting about everything. Both types of people are valuable to society as a whole and keep each other in a balance in a "normal" state of affairs.

The only place spending is out of control is defense spending, which is why the GOP can't propose anything.

It's not "defense spending". When we buy a tank, we get an asset. An asset that goes 40 miles an hour and blows shiat up. That's investing. Defense investing, and investing is always a good thing. It's even better when you do it on margin, to take advantage of leverage.Spending is only when we give services to poor people. When we give food stamps, we don't get an asset back. We get fat poor people back, and no one knows what to do with fat poor people. This is what we're talking about. This is spending. This is the problem.

Trivia Jockey:kid_icarus: Absolutely. Come with me to my family xmas dinner, and you can hear all about how liberals support big government & big spending, and they're bankrupting the country by wanting to give handouts to all the deadbeats and also socialism.

The only place spending is out of control is defense spending, which is why the GOP can't propose anything.

It's not "defense spending". When we buy a tank, we get an asset. An asset that goes 40 miles an hour and blows shiat up. That's investing. Defense investing, and investing is always a good thing. It's even better when you do it on margin, to take advantage of leverage.Spending is only when we give services to poor people. When we give food stamps, we don't get an asset back. We get fat poor people back, and no one knows what to do with fat poor people. This is what we're talking about. This is spending. This is the problem.

Two major problems in your post.

1) Assets cost money to maintain. We have an excess of assets that are unused that only cost us. They cost us to create and cost us to maintain. The investment is pure cost.

2) We get assets back from spending on the poor because it helps keep them participating in the economy, which benefits us all. That's why welfare reform was so successful and good for the country in the 90s. It was focused on keeping people people participating in and contributing to the economy.

rumpelstiltskin:It's not "defense spending". When we buy a tank, we get an asset. An asset that goes 40 miles an hour and blows shiat up. That's investing. Defense investing, and investing is always a good thing. It's even better when you do it on margin, to take advantage of leverage.Spending is only when we give services to poor people. When we give food stamps, we don't get an asset back. We get fat poor people back, and no one knows what to do with fat poor people. This is what we're talking about. This is spending. This is the problem.

Trivia Jockey:rumpelstiltskin: It's not "defense spending". When we buy a tank, we get an asset. An asset that goes 40 miles an hour and blows shiat up. That's investing. Defense investing, and investing is always a good thing. It's even better when you do it on margin, to take advantage of leverage.Spending is only when we give services to poor people. When we give food stamps, we don't get an asset back. We get fat poor people back, and no one knows what to do with fat poor people. This is what we're talking about. This is spending. This is the problem.